Thoughts on a 3 lens travel kit

<p>For the past couple of years, my business travelling has all been on a very tight schedule, not leaving much time for photography. As a result, I've taken to travelling with a single lens, either my 16-45 f4 or a 35 f2. I now have a trip coming up where I have a bit of spare time. I've looked at what I have and picked out a 3 lens kit consisting of a Sigma 10-20, the 35 f2 and the 70 f2.4. This covers the focal lengths I like and doesn't involve too much extra weight or bulk.<br>

Anyone tried anything similar?</p>

<p>I would miss a macro prime and take a 24mm with me but it sounds like a nice setup Henk.</p>

<p>You have a "hole" between 20 and 35mm in my opinion. For me it's the range of most of my pictures in travel. During film decades I used three lenses in travel, 24, 35 and 85 mm or one a 28/105 mm. Now with my Pentax I use 16/45 or 17/70 and exceptionally 55/300. Even a 14 mm Samyang and a Pentax A 100 mm.<br>

All my pictures of a trip in Laos were taken with 17/70 mm Sigma.<br>

I plan to buy a 24 mm with an aperture of f2.<br>

<a href="http://m.lemandat.free.fr/coppermine/">http://m.lemandat.free.fr/coppermine/</a></p>

<p>I do this a few times a year when I need to travel for my day job. That sounds like a good kit to me. Does it all fit in your small travel bag? I like to go lean with my Crumpler 4 Million Dollar Home and what I can fit in it.<br>

I typically go with just the da15 and da40, but sometimes will also bring my M 100, DA L 55-300, or the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and a flash if I'm going to be taking pics at an event like a cocktail party for clients (I'm the go-to photog for the software company I work for). If I have room I'll also throw the tripod in my suitcase. Often my only photo time is at night on these trips so the tripod is almost a necessity.<br>

But those two Limiteds come along the most. I wouldn't mind adding the da70 Limited to the small kit at some point either!</p>

Thanks for the comments.

 

@Matt: I'll have a monopod with me.

My tripod is not the most portable in

the world.

 

@Michel: I also thought about the

"hole" there. I'm not too concerned as

I've been fine with only the 35 in the

past. I could always add my M28 f3.5

with no real weight penalty.

 

If I had to dream up the ideal travel kit

it would probably be a Kr with the 4

pancake Limiteds.

<p>My travel kit: 21mm, 40mm, 70mm and sometimes the 100mm Macro. I can fit the pancakes in my jacket/pant's pockets. 70mm is the hardest to fit so I rides on the camera most times. I need to add the 15mm, then I will be done except possibly switching out the 70mm for the 77mm. </p>

<p>For a long time I used nearly the same kit:<br>

Sigma 10-20, DA40Ltd, and DA70Ltd. Oftentimes I discovered that I would much rather have a zoom for the middle range focal lengths because sooner or later I was going to drop one of my Limiteds on the concrete or cobblestones. </p>

<p>I just did a trip to Puerto Rico. K20d, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 28-75 2.8, and Sigma 70-300 APO DG. I have to say this was the best 3-lens travel setup I have ever carried. 80% of the time the 28-75 fits the bill. In tight quarters such as narrow streets or in big scenics the 10-20 is perfect. For the very rare times I need to reach out there is the 70-300. </p>

<p>The one thing I am adding is a bean bag. For carry-on travel a tripod is usually a no-no. I keep a little gorilla pod, but with the vertical grip on the K20d and a hefty lens, there are times I just don't trust it. A simple bean bag to help me stablize the camera on a flat surface is what I need, as oftentimes indoors a long exposure is called for.</p>

<p>I once did a vacation with just the FA31 Limited. Last year I repeated that with a normal lens for the MFT system. I don't like to change lenses and if one is really good, I just enjoy using it.</p>

<p>On a recent trip I took just an FA43 and a FA 24-90. That worked pretty well. I've been thinking about the DA 18-135 for wider range and WR, plus a fast prime.</p>

<p>I just picked up a small gadget bag at a camera show. It has two small padded main compartments<br>

and an outside pocket. My idea is to pick a camera body and lens from my collection and<br>

hang them around my neck, with two other lenses in the bag on my shoulder for walk abouts.<br>

Best regards,<br>

/Clay</p>

 

<p>I obviously travel quite heavy, my basic three lenses for an important trip are 12-24, 28-70 FA f2.8 and Sigma EX 70-200 f2.8 on two bodies.<br>

Often I add a 300 f4.5 and a 50mm f1.4 or a macro if I expect nature to be a subject. If you do not expect to use teles, then only 12-24 and 28-70 (or a 24-90, as mentioned) should suffice.</p>

<p>Hank,</p>

<p>I travel like this all the time. Though I opted for the 15mm, 21mm, 35mmT&S or 43mm, and 90mm. So 4 lenses, but about the same bulk and weight to your three, probably smaller without the 35mm T&S.</p>

<p>The biggest advantage of this system over 1 or 2 zooms is that some places have rules in terms of lens length. A 90mm f/3.5 might be just fine but a 28-70 f/2.8 will not be. A half stop on the 3.5 isn't going to kill me. Likewise, I didn't like the bulk of the Sigma as a walk around lens. Much prefer the 21mm with the option to go wide with the 15mm.</p>

<p>The downside is more lens changes, perhaps some missed shots. You can negate this these days by carrying a digital compact that should be adequate for quick shots where you happen to have the wrong lens on the camera -such as a 15mm when you need a 70mm.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>some places have rules in terms of lens length. A 90mm f/3.5 might be just fine but a 28-70 f/2.8 will not be. </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Sorry, I don't understand: to what places do you refer to? Wouldn't a light crop on the 70 do the trick if needed?<br>

My choice of zooms and two bodies is exactly to minimize lens changes, after my first trip with my first digital SLR brought a large number of pictures affected by dust specks.<br>

Basically the 12-24 stays always on the camera with the higher resolution, the 28-70 most of the time on the second, swapped with a longer lens if needed. If I am in a nature-oriented environment, 70-200 on the first and 300 on the other.</p>

<p>My wife and I went to Scotland this past September, saw Edinburgh, some of the western Highlands, and then Inverness. I had my DA 15mm and 21mm Limited, and my DA 55-300. Of the 900+ shots I took, 95% were with the 21mm. It provides an almost-35mm lens/35mm camera view. And because it provides such a high quality image, heavy cropping on the computer, if necessary, was no big deal at all. I think your choice seems good, and if that were my kit, the 10-20 would probably be mounted most of the time.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the comments. I was thinking about this for 2 reasons. Firstly, I had been convincing myself to buy the DA70 f2.4 and needed to justify this. The quality and image quality of the lens more than justify the purchase. The other reason was that, for a change, I have been able to build an extra day or so into a business trip and am spending two days in Istanbul (Will post results to POTW soon).<br>

I've taken the kit I mentioned with me and it does everything I need. Unfortunately, the Sigma 10-20 which I have always found reasonably good is not in the same league as the FA35 and the DA70. I'm now wondering about an ultra-wide prime (15 f4, 14 f2.8 etc.)</p>

<p>Henk, I agree. The DA70 is the best small format lens I own. I absolutely love my 10-20, but a Limited it ain't. Given enough exposure, the 10-20 can do wonderful things. What it lacks in speed and low light ability it more than makes up for in versatility. I use mine 90% of the time at 10mm, and for now there isn't much of an alternative that I am aware of. </p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/search/?cx=006577976762569540560%3A1n8vmghdzjw&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&q=14mm+15mm+inurl%3A%2Fpentax-camera-forum%2F&filter=0&tbs=&sa=Search+Photo.net&siteurl=photo.net%252Fsearch%252F%253Fcx%253D000753226439295166877%253A0gyn0h9z85o%2526cof%253DFORID%253A11%2526ie%253DUTF-8%2526q%253D15mm%252Bvs%252B14mm%252Binurl%253A%252Fpentax-camera-forum%252F%2526qx%253D15mm%252Bvs%252B14mm%2526sa%253DSearch%252BThis%252BForum</p>

<p>And the 15mm vs. 14mm debate... At F/2.8, the 14mm is double the size and weight- almost 15oz compared to the 7+oz of the F/4 15mm. The 14mm is also about $150 more expensive, too. That's a lot of weight and cash to gain one extra stop of speed (F/4 to F/2.8).</p>

<p>An important attribute of the DA14 is that is focuses closer. So people can better achieve those "small thing in the foreground and big landscape in the background" type gimmick shots that make it to magazine covers.</p>

<p>Henk, I think your three-lens kit sounds just fine. And I do use something similar: DA12-24, FA43, FA77. In fact, I can easily skip the FA43, but since it's so easy to pack...</p>

<p>Robin- the 14mm doesn't have that much better close focus capability than the 15mm. Per the Pentax website, 15mm has .59' (7.08", we'll call that 7"), while the 14mm has 6.72" minimum. (Strange how Pentax Imaging gives two different types of measurements for two of their lenses.) Anyway, the 14mm betters the 15mm by just under 3/8" minimum focusing distance.</p>

<p>I'm pretty sure you were just pointing this out in jest anyway...</p>

<p>We are leaving tomorrow to Hawaii for my wife's birthday. I am taking an old Tokina 20-35, Tamrom 28-75 and Pentax 18-250. These all fit into a small backpack along with my K-10. I use Mountainsmith lens cases and wrap the body in a skin. I would like to upgrade my kit, but you can guess where the money went instead. Unlike many of the posters, I seem to often use the higher end of the Pentax zoom. I also have a W-90 for snaps and movies.</p>

<p>Steve, actually I didn't mean it in jest, but was passing on what others have told me about why they like the DA14. I suppose that one extra stop plus the 1cm additional close focus might make a significant difference in the images? I haven't tried.</p>

<p>Oops- sorry, Robin. You're right, I guess those attributes could be worth the added cost to someone.</p>

<p>I have three Sigmas, since Pentax prices are beyond my means these days. 10-20 f4-5.6, 24-60 f 2.8, and 70-300 f4-5.6. Some minor gaps in there, but they cover most of a 15-450mm equivalent range. Someday for single focal length lenses...</p>

<p> </p>

<p>When I need to travel with a light photographic load, I carry a compact camera.<br>

However, when I need to travel with a 3-lens Pentax kit, here is what I carry.</p>

<p><a href=" </div>